Paul wrote:
>
> Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bortel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>What about NTFS? I know that Linux -> NTFS is read only.
>
>
>>That is mainly because *any* software, ported from Linux/GNu
>>domains to Microsoft, have some remark like "due to the instability
>>of the OS you want to run this software on, we cannot guarantee the
>>normal levels of operation and performance"
>
>
>
> FAT is read/write no problem. It is with NTFS that there is a problem,
> in that most (all?) Linux distros will guarantee reads but not writes.
>
>
>
>>You can have NTFS read/write from Linux (Knoppix will do that out of
>>the box), but no warranties...
>
>
>
> Well, no warranties is the same as saying "Go run Oracle on OpenBSD" -
> it is known to work but will not be supported in any shape or form.
>
>
>
>>>There are systems out there with 32 MB of RAM on the first Pentium
>>>processors which are working systems. I doubt if one could do anything
>>>with a current version of Oracle with such a machine.
>
>
>
>
>>Right... let's see how version 10 of Interbase/Firebird behaves,
>>then,
>
>
>
> Interbase/Firebird has been around for approximately as long as
> Oracle, particularly if you consider its heritage from DEC Rdb
> projects from the same original architect. However, unlike Oracle, it
> has always been designed to be self-tuning and to need very little
> DBA/user intervention.
>
>
>
>> OK? And please, do install all options Oracle has standard.
>
>
>
> Unfair! I am merely saying that Firebird consumes vastly fewer CPU
> cycles than Oracle - I made no reference to the gazillion features of
> Oracle which do not exist in FB (or many other resource hungry db
> systems).
>
> I have tried to stress before and will continue to try and emphasise
> that the two systems are different, but both are RDBMS's. Oracle is a
> kitchen-sink implementation and pays the price for that in terms of
> machine load, admin overhead and hardware requirements.
>
> Interbase/Firebird (and particularly Firebird, since we can actually
> see where the raw code is going - the move to C++ combined with an
> (sometimes painfully fussy - even "overdemocratic") Open Source model
> ) is a very small, neat, effective and even elegant RDMS solution for
> *_A LOT_* of people's needs.
>
> I am *_NOT_* saying that it has all of the capabilities of Oracle,
> that would be ridiculous, however I am saying that given its small
> overhead and its suitability for a (growing) number of database
> projects, I think that there is something that is to be learnt from
> the FB model. The whole install is 32 MB (with examples and samples).
> The server itself is 1.493 MB. It will run on a server with 32 MB of
> RAM.
>
>
> Personally, I find that the fact that one can do *_an awful lot_* of
> what one can do with Oracle with such a small *_elegant_* system to be
> telling somewhat of what might be seen as feature bloat with Oracle. I
> have used it to programme systems and it is perfect - no overhead, no
> DBA, no loss of necessary speed and perfect data consisitency over
> years of in production use on modest machines.
>
>
> I'm sick to the back teeth of Oracle "people" talking about other
> RDBMS's as "toy databases". That's like the users of a Ferrari or a
> Lamborghini talking about the VW Beatle (or Bug or Cocinelle or
> whatever it was called where you happen to live) as a "toy" car. It
> may not have had the speed or facile aesthetics of an F/L, but it gets
> the job done and doesn't need a specialist team of mechanics working
> on it night and day to get the damn thing to work, constantly reparing
> it, and needing to know off the top of their heads 3 million db
> parameters for it to work at all in the first place.
>
>
> I will finish this rant with the words of Antoine de St. Exupéry,
> "True beauty is not achieved when there is nothing more to add, but
> rather when there is nothing more to be taken away".
>
>
> Paul...
>
>
Who is unfair here?
Who compared Firebird with the current version of Oracle?
And I loved my Beetle, but it's not the car I'd prefer now that I
have a family of six.
--
Regards,
Frank van Bortel
Top-posting is one way to shut me up...
Received on Tue Oct 18 2005 - 12:41:30 CDT
